On Wed, 10.12.14 16:33, Krzysztof Kotlenga (k.kotle...@sims.pl) wrote: > On Tue, 2014-12-09 at 17:28 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Tue, 09.12.14 16:24, Krzysztof Kotlenga (k.kotle...@sims.pl) wrote: > > > >> Currently notify socket is unavailable in chrooted services (again) > >> unless you bind mount it there. Is there perhaps another, less > >> cumbersome way? > >> > >> So far notify socket was: > >> [snip change history] > >> > >> So... would it be acceptable to have two notify sockets, one > >> abstract and one normal, the latter only set for services with > >> PrivateNetwork or - better maybe - explicitly selectable? Any other > >> ideas? > > > > Hmm, but what would you do for a service that has both > > PrivateNetwork and chroot enabled? > > Well, PrivateNetwork is clearly asking for trouble... A socket doesn't > really look like a right tool for the job in this case. I know Unix > signals were previously discarded in > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833105 > > Dunno what's left.
AF_UNIX sockets in the file system namespace are unaffected from PrivateNetwork= really. It's just the combination of file system rearrangements and PrivateNetwork= that is the problem... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list email@example.com http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel